gregmcc: If the boot is in place then it meets the segeration requirments

Not as far as Telecom was concerned or the Telecommunications Carriers' Forum Code of Practice

"35.3. Under NO circumstances shall Low Voltage (LV e.g., 230 V) sockets, switches or modules be mounted on the same faceplate as TNV or ELV components (voltage levels at which telecommunications and data services operate). The joint Australia/New Zealand Wiring Rules (AS/NZS 3000) require that all faceplates comply with AS/NZS 3112, clause 3.2 of which prohibits mixing of these voltage levels on the same faceplate. "

This is a code of practice issued by a private company, there is no legal requirnment for it to be followed, what matters are the electrical regulations and the AS/NZS 3000, BTW AS/NZS 3112 only says that a facplate that has a socket shall not incorprate an ELV outlet such as telecoms. but it would make a plate that has a light switch ok to have it with

AS/NZS 3000 Amd 1 refers to the earlier Telecom version of the TCF Code. I'd expect that to change to the TCF code eventually.

"3.9.8.4 Proximity to non-electrical services

(c) Telecommunication services Requirements for the separation of telecommunications cables from low voltage and high voltage systems are provided— (i) for Australia, in AS/ACIF S009 Installation requirements for customer cabling (Wiring Rules); and (ii) for New Zealand, in PTC 103 and PTC 106. "

PTC 106

"5.1.3 Connection of 230 V and ELV/TNV on same TO faceplate (1) Under NO circumstances shall Low Voltage (LV e.g., 230 V) sockets, switches or modules be mounted on the same faceplate as TNV or ELV components (voltage levels at which telecommunications and data services operate).

The joint Australia/New Zealand Wiring Rules (AS/NZS 3000) require that all faceplates comply with AS/NZS 3112, clause 3.2 of which prohibits mixing of these voltage levels on the same faceplate. "

I don't have 3112 to check whether Clause 3.2 refers to all faceplates or just to socket outlets as you say.

Apart from safety issues if the faceplate has LV services on it only Registered persons (or the home owner if he lives in the house) can legally remove it. That would stop nearly all Telco staff.

cyril7: Hi, AS/NZ3000-2007 was issued in .....................2007, but the separation requirement has been there from way before that, we are talking 15yrs or more.

I work in an industry where we are managing data and electrical installers who flaunt this law daily, and the ELWB (electrical wiring board) are now taking note and persecuting these electricians who are placing the public safety at risk.

Cyril

Persecuting? Crikey, that's one way of getting people to follow the rules, rather than simple one off fines!

The EWRB used to have public floggings each month, these were held on the last page of Electron, these seem to now stay behind locked doors since Electron has taken a PDF only life.

timbosan: I generally remove a square or rectangle around the nogs, and again near studs (for face plates) then simply patch it up, fill the gaps, and repaint.

In a rush, I've seen this done with a chainsaw. Just notch the dwang, forming a small slot by running down with the tip of the chainsaw blade, sit the coax into this and repatch with filler. Rough, yep.

cyril7: Yep, PTC106 are referenced in AS/NZ3000-2007, this does (and I have had that clarified by the appropriate oracle) that this makes the refernced section of PTC106 law!.

Cyril

Sorry the standards are not law, the regulations are law, the standards are the reccomended way to comply with the law.

3.9.9.2 basially says cables of different voltage levels must either both be double insulated, or insulated for the highest voltage present or by segeration

typically cat5 coax are not rated for 230v/400v, but the use of a segeration boot at the face plate does provide the insulation rating required, speration is required where the cables leave the enclosure.

quoting the PTC is a waste of time as it is only a recommedation and only applys to POTS, not to ethernet/tv aerials/any other extra low voltage circuit.

cyril7: Ummm sorry but the regulations now make AS/NZ3000 now law, this has been for some time, essentially the legislated regulation has extended to the standard, well as I was last advised by the oracles.

Cyril

As a person who is involved in the industry and have repeatly have been told every 2 years, "The regulations are the law, the standards are the advised method to obtain compliance"

Standards are an approved method.

Saying that....prove me wrong....quote the relevent legislation that says that the standards are the law

cyril7: Ummm sorry but the regulations now make AS/NZ3000 now law, this has been for some time, essentially the legislated regulation has extended to the standard, well as I was last advised by the oracles.

cyril7: Ummm sorry but the regulations now make AS/NZ3000 now law, this has been for some time, essentially the legislated regulation has extended to the standard, well as I was last advised by the oracles.

Part 5Safety of installations57 Low voltage and extra-low voltage installations to complywith AS/NZS 3000(1) Every installation that operates at low voltage or extra-lowvoltage must comply with either Part 1 or Part 2 of AS/NZS3000.(2) A person who installs any part of a low voltage installationmust—(a) before starting the installation, hold a declaration ofconformity that complies with regulation 58 for that partof the installation; and(b) ensure that the installation complies with the relevantPart of AS/NZS 3000 identified in the declaration ofconformity; and(c) in the case of an installation designed under Part 1 ofAS/NZS 3000, ensure that the installation is installed inaccordance with the design identified in the declarationof conformity.(3) The installer must retain a copy of the declaration of conformityfor an installation for at least 3 years, and make a copy ofit available to the Secretary on request.(4) A person who installs a low voltage installation commits agrade A offence if he or she fails to comply with subclause(2) or (3).Compare: SR 1997/60 r 69A

Basically here is an approved method (AS/NZS3000), it still does not make the standard law, and reading the regulation it deals more with DOC's than anything else.

3000:2007 is superseded (I'm told by an electrician), there is a newer version which must be referenced but many electricians still reference 2007. I've got 3000:2007 at work but not the new one (we do not do electrical installations, just for information).

Must comply with either part 1 or part 2? In 3000:2007 part 1 is definitions and part 2 is all the installation practice clauses. So if the install complies with part 1 (definitions) it is fine?

Clause 7.5.4: Exception: SELV and PELV circuit conductors installed in accordance with Clause 3.9.8.3 may be contained within the same wiring system as low voltage circuits.

Clause 3.9.8.2: Cables of low voltage circuits and cables of extra-low voltage circuits may be enclosed in the same wiring system only where one of the following arrangements is employed: (a) The low voltage cables shall be of a type providing the equivalent of double insulation. (b) All cables or each conductor of a multi-core cable shall be insulated for the highest voltage present. (c) The low voltage cables shall be installed in a separate compartment of a common cable trunking system having fixed and continuous barriers between compartments.

Network and phone cables comply with clause 3.9.8.2 b), but the ends which are stripped do not so it needs a separate face plate. Also, if the owner replace e.g. a phone face plate and there is mains on it he might bring the wires too close together. Different face plates mean segregation of the wire ends, or it does when flush boxes are used, our electrician used mounting brackets.

Niel: 3000:2007 is superseded (I'm told by an electrician), there is a newer version which must be referenced but many electricians still reference 2007. I've got 3000:2007 at work but not the new one (we do not do electrical installations, just for information).

Must comply with either part 1 or part 2? In 3000:2007 part 1 is definitions and part 2 is all the installation practice clauses. So if the install complies with part 1 (definitions) it is fine?

Clause 7.5.4: Exception: SELV and PELV circuit conductors installed in accordance with Clause 3.9.8.3 may be contained within the same wiring system as low voltage circuits.

Clause 3.9.8.2: Cables of low voltage circuits and cables of extra-low voltage circuits may be enclosed in the same wiring system only where one of the following arrangements is employed: (a) The low voltage cables shall be of a type providing the equivalent of double insulation. (b) All cables or each conductor of a multi-core cable shall be insulated for the highest voltage present. (c) The low voltage cables shall be installed in a separate compartment of a common cable trunking system having fixed and continuous barriers between compartments.

Network and phone cables comply with clause 3.9.8.2 b), but the ends which are stripped do not so it needs a separate face plate. Also, if the owner replace e.g. a phone face plate and there is mains on it he might bring the wires too close together. Different face plates mean segregation of the wire ends, or it does when flush boxes are used, our electrician used mounting brackets.

the insulation of phone or data cables are not rated for 230v so they don't comply with part BI'm picking you are looking at the 300V rating on the cable, this is a fire rating not a voltage rating

No, I did not look at the cable actually. How about a) then, equivalent of double insulation i.e. 2 layers?

It is not hard to find 1500V dielectric, 300V rated network cable. For example http://www.pacificcable.com/Cat_6_Tutorial.htm The rated voltage is continuous. The dielectric rating is safety in brief overvoltage due to surges, lightning, etc. The company I work at makes electric fence energizers which output 10,000V but still needs a dielectric withstand voltage test primary to secondary.

Niel: No, I did not look at the cable actually. How about a) then, equivalent of double insulation i.e. 2 layers?

It is not hard to find 1500V dielectric, 300V rated network cable. For example http://www.pacificcable.com/Cat_6_Tutorial.htm The rated voltage is continuous. The dielectric rating is safety in brief overvoltage due to surges, lightning, etc. The company I work at makes electric fence energizers which output 10,000V but still needs a dielectric withstand voltage test primary to secondary.

Given that Cat6 has an extra shield and plastic layer and jacket thicker than the internal wires insulation, I do not see issue.

You also get specialist cables like a so called pink cable rated over 3000V dielectric withstand.

The shield in cat6 is effectly a current carry conductor so that rules out the double insulation, and i've yet to see a cat5/6 cable that is stamped with the markings that it meets the standard for LV installation

Hi Greg, I will concede that yes the standard does not appear to have its status elevated to be a true extension of the regulation and thus law, but the regulations have been changed (as of 2010) to pretty much make adherence to the standard as if it were law, the following link pretty much explains the status.

Regardless, failure to adhere to separation requirements in the standard and referenced comments of PTC106 (ie LV and ELV on a single faceplate) will bring action from the wiring board as failures to adhere to legal regulations via the standard.

And to the poster that said that AS/NZ3000-2007 is out of date, this is incorrect, there are several ammendments, but its still the current standard.